ObjectiveThere is emerging evidence that COVID-19 disproportionately affects people from racial/ethnic minority and low socioeconomic status (SES) groups. Many physicians across the globe are changing practice patterns in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. We sought to examine the practice changes among rheumatologists and what they perceive the impact to be on their most vulnerable patients.MethodsWe administered an online survey to a convenience sample of rheumatologists worldwide during the initial height of the pandemic (between 8 April and 4 May 2020) via social media and group emails. We surveyed rheumatologists about their opinions regarding patients from low SES and racial/ethnic minority groups in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Mainly, what their specific concerns were, including the challenges of medication access; and about specific social factors (health literacy, poverty, food insecurity, access to telehealth video) that may be complicating the management of rheumatologic conditions during this time.Results548 rheumatologists responded from 64 countries and shared concerns of food insecurity, low health literacy, poverty and factors that preclude social distancing such as working and dense housing conditions among their patients. Although 82% of rheumatologists had switched to telehealth video, 17% of respondents estimated that about a quarter of their patients did not have access to telehealth video, especially those from below the poverty line. The majority of respondents believed these vulnerable patients, from racial/ethnic minorities and from low SES groups, would do worse, in terms of morbidity and mortality, during the pandemic.ConclusionIn this sample of rheumatologists from 64 countries, there is a clear shift in practice to telehealth video consultations and widespread concern for socially and economically vulnerable patients with rheumatic disease.

No abstract

No abstract

Background The use of social media assists in the distribution of COVID-19 information to the general public and health professionals. Alternative-level metrics (ie, altmetrics) and PlumX metrics are new bibliometrics that can assess how many times a scientific article has been shared and how much a scientific article has spread within social media platforms. Objective Our objective was to characterize and compare the traditional bibliometrics (ie, citation count and impact factors) and new bibliometrics (ie, Altmetric Attention Score [AAS] and PlumX score) of the top 100 COVID-19 articles with the highest AASs. Methods The top 100 articles with highest AASs were identified with Altmetric Explorer in May 2020. The AASs, journal names, and the number of mentions in various social media databases of each article were collected. Citation counts and PlumX Field-Weighted Citation Impact scores were collected from the Scopus database. Additionally, AASs, PlumX scores, and citation counts were log-transformed and adjusted by +1 for linear regression, and Spearman correlation coefficients were used to determine correlations. Results The median AAS, PlumX score, and citation count were 4922.50, 37.92, and 24.00, respectively. The New England Journal of Medicine published the most articles (18/100, 18%). The highest number of mentions (985,429/1,022,975, 96.3%) were found on Twitter, making it the most frequently used social media platform. A positive correlation was observed between AAS and citation count (r2=0.0973; P=.002), and between PlumX score and citation count (r2=0.8911; P<.001). Conclusions Our study demonstrated that citation count weakly correlated with AASs and strongly correlated with PlumX scores, with regard to COVID-19 articles at this point in time. Altmetric and PlumX metrics should be used to complement traditional citation counts when assessing the dissemination and impact of a COVID-19 article.

No abstract